|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Nature and the fall of man | |||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Who are we to say that this girl's plight is not the best situation for that family and her at this time in their existance? The idea expressed here is grotesque.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LinearAq Member (Idle past 4705 days) Posts: 598 From: Pocomoke City, MD Joined: |
LinearAq writes:
I assume you read the rest of my post and discounted it out of hand. I write this because you have gone back to the there-is-tragedy-therefore-there-is-no-God mantra. Who are we to say that this girl's plight is not the best situation for that family and her at this time in their existance?
to which robinrohan writes: The idea expressed here is grotesqueBy what criteria do you make this judgement? What makes that criteria valid? Why can't God have a better view of things than you and then plan events accordingly? Look, I can't prove God exists any more than anyone else here; much less that the Fundamentalist Christian God is the right one.But I disagree that you should discount the existance of a god because he/she/it does not conform to your definition of proper behavior. You may disbelieve in particular gods because it appears that the world doesn't work in the manner that their "revealed word" states that they are running it. Again, you would have to provide a pretty strong arguement that you are interpreting that "revealed word" properly in order to make that judgement. See how amorphous this starts to get? God-in-a-box just can't be done without knowing what this God knows. Our same lack of knowledge also means that the box is not necessarily empty either. So, who are we to decide what is best? From your point of view, would you have sent soldiers off to die in Iraq? How about Vietnam? Europe, Africa and the Pacific in WWII?What was the right thing to do in each of those cases? The parents of the girls love them. If it is the girls that I think you are talking about, they have friends. They have activities that they like to do. I am reasonably sure they don't like to be thought of as grotesque.Perhaps their situation is best or at least "very good".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 641 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
I quoted from 3 different Jewish sources. I quoted from very repected Rabbi's, and you say my source is inaccurate?
I am sorry, but you will not find ONE Jewish source that isn't a "messanic" jewish source (i.e. christians dressed up and playing jewish), that will agree that original sin is a concept that is accepted. Let me put those links up again http://www.convert.org/differ.htmhttp://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq-os.html Judaism's Rejection of Original Sin And then lets continue with a few more sources. Jewish view of Original Sin The Biblical Timeline And a christian source http://www.greatcom.org/...es/areadydefense/ch28/default.htm Shall I go on?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 641 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
You are trying to tell some Jewish people what they believe in?? Really now.
You will not find ONE Jewish source that says Judaism thinks there is original sin at all. (Except , like I said, the "Messanics" who actually are Christians dressed up and playing being Jewish)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
The Original Sin discussion has grown beyond its relation to the Original Topic.
There is a thread concerning Original Sin if the participants wish to continue this line of discussion. This message has been edited by AdminPD, 12-30-2005 10:32 AM Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4706 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
The suffering is important. The Buddha emphasized the importance of suffering. In Buddhism suffering has a key function indicating the possibility of awakening, of motivating awakening.
The realm of birth and death, called samsara, though it holds pleasure is fundamentally suffering. Literal western religions unfamiliar with nirvana attempt to imagine a samsara without suffering i.e. no birth and death hence the notions of paradise, eden, heaven as something in the past, the future, or celestial. Suffering is real. It should not be explained away however or cursed etc. but understood. The process of insight in suffering and into who suffers can lead to transformation and understanding. This is tangential to the purpose of your OP as I am introducing non Christian viewpoints. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Literal western religions unfamiliar with nirvana attempt to imagine a samsara without suffering i.e. no birth and death hence the notions of paradise, eden, heaven as something in the past, the future, or celestial. Don't think this is a peculiarly western notion. In my investigations of Eastern religions on my way to Christ, I encountered views of Samsara that included both hells and celestial realms or paradises in the afterlife, or the in-between lives, all related to the concept of karma, or how many good deeds versus bad deeds you had accumulated in your previous life. These were all temporary and led to yet another physical life in which you had a new chance to do better. {ABE: Realized you were talking about something different, sorry.} I understand Nirvana to be a stepping out of the entire wheel of multiple incarnations so that you no longer have to go through them, but what it is experientially I have no idea -- the descriptions don't convey anything clear. Funny thing, before I was fully a Christian but already most interested in Christianity, I had some "supernatural" experiences, some beautiful, some scary (I was high as a kite as it were on the supernatural) and a Buddhist friend of mine told me that one of them I described to her was a Satori, which I'd thought was an exclusively Buddhist experience. Since you appear to have experience in things Buddhist or Eastern, how do you understand that term? To try to relate this obviously off-topic post back to the topic, it's interesting that nothing explains why we are subject to good and bad states in any religion other than Biblical Christianity. They are simply taken for granted. The Fall is a most satisfying explanation. This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 01:57 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ReverendDG Member (Idle past 4139 days) Posts: 1119 From: Topeka,kansas Joined: |
true there are differing variations within christian doctrine, but I'm asking randman this because everytime I show that the jews didn't agree with original sin he dismisses it as irrelevent because its the "exstreme" version of the doctrine, I want to know what is exstreme about it, so far he says theres some sort of slide-rule for it.
The thing is lfen I view "sinful" "sin" as the usual things that have been thought as sinful, murder,stealing,etc well everything is grey in life, have yet have anyone who can put forth anything as an absulute
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Just for the record, I've understood both from Jewish friends and Jewish websites that they reject the idea of original sin completely. I'm not sure where Randman thinks he's encountered a different view.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4706 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
Faith,
It's been quite a few years since I read much in Zen (a Japanese sect of the Mahayana Dhyana sect) of Buddhism. Sartori is I think a Japanese word that was used in regard to enlightenment or enlightenment experiences. I understand this to be an experience so it's not the final awakening as there is still an ego or self left that returns to "possessing" an experience.
I understand Nirvana to be a stepping out of the entire wheel of multiple incarnations so that you no longer have to go through them, but what it is experientially I have no idea -- the descriptions don't convey anything clear. The descriptions are very rough tools to point attention somewhere else and this is made even harder because the nondual is not an experience! The so called "experience" of the non dual is the dropping away of the illusion of a concrete individual "experiencer". This dropping away is something that happens and I think has happened to individuals in many religions. In the case of Buddhism it happened to the founder and so was fundamental to the development of the practise. I've not read all you've written here so my impression may be wrong but I don't think the Catholic contemplative traditions of Christianity are of great interest to you. However that is one tradition within Christianity that has resulted in awakening. Many times here I have recommended Bernadette Roberts book The Experience of No Self as the best Christian treatment of this subject that I know of.
it's interesting that nothing explains why we are subject to good and bad states in any religion other than Biblical Christianity. They are simply taken for granted. The Fall is a most satisfying explanation. Well, the "Fall" as an explanation is satisfying to you and to many others. It never satisfied me, and you read others on the forum who find it lacking. I'm not sure what you mean by "nothing explains". Perhaps you are saying that you find all other explanations meaningless? Certainly different religions as well as philosophies offer explanations. One example would be karma. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4706 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
The thing is lfen I view "sinful" "sin" as the usual things that have been thought as sinful, murder,stealing,etc Rev, A thought struck me reading that sentence. Does the concept of "original sin" simply refer to the fact that every human has the possibility of doing things like that and the story of the Fall imagines that at one time humans either didn't have that capacity or perhaps didn't know they could do those things? There does seem to be some relationship of suffering and sin. At least some of the things designated as "sinful" result in suffering. The idea that one time life was idyllic is found in many ancient origin stories. I think it expresses psychological longings, wish fulfilments, etc. But those of literal bent choose to believe that life without suffering is actually possible and was the norm a long time ago. Ah well ... lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Does the concept of "original sin" simply refer to the fact that every human has the possibility of doing things like that and the story of the Fall imagines that at one time humans either didn't have that capacity or perhaps didn't know they could do those things? I think that's an apt description of what many believe. However, reading the Biblical accounts I can find no support for that belief. The story in Genesis is quite clear that the potential for doing wrong has been part of man, and GOD from the very beginning. Had that potential not been there the story would make no sense. The Genesis tale is not one of some Fall, but rather a great gift and a subsequent charge that went with the gift. The only difference between Adam and Eve before eating the forbidden fruit and after eating the forbidden fruit is that afterwards, they knew what they had done was wrong. The whole rest of the Bible is devoted to explaining the charge that went with that gift of knowledge. Now that you know the difference between right and wrong, GOD charges you with trying to do right. It really is as simple as that. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Karma doesn't explain anything, it merely describes the cause-effect round of suffering on account of bad deeds or reward for good deeds. The Fall explains why it occurs.
I was as a matter of fact strongly attracted to the Catholic contemplative tradition. It was the doorway into Christianity for me. I thought I wanted to be a contemplative nun during that period. But I was attracted to the real tradition of the old saints, not to Bernadette Roberts or any of the other contemporaries who are mavericks outside that tradition. But then much of the whole tradition is now maverick, bordering on witchcraft at times. I found Roberts' writings alien and offputting as a matter of fact. The experience that was called a Satori could maybe best be described as superintense compassion. At a cafe, my eyes fell on a man in a wheelchair and I was immediately gripped with empathy for his suffering, as if I were being squeezed from head to toe like a sponge, by a gigantic hand. No ordinary emotion that. It nearly squeezed the breath out of me. I couldn't stay at the cafe, had to get home. Thought those things only happened in formal meditation. I guess not. I'm not sure why that one would be called something special, however, as to me it was only an intensification of emotion, and I'd been going through intensifications of various emotions for about a week -- joy, fear, love, hatred, etc. They'd just hit me out of the blue for no clear reason related to anything I could use to explain them. As a matter of fact my dominant ordinary emotion at the time was elation at having discovered God. So these unusual heightenings of emotion didn't seem to be coming from me in other words, but to be imposed on me. Kind of like going through all the emotions of Samsara maybe, as it were. They didn't normally last long, maybe an hour. I was SO glad when they stopped altogether. I personally think they were caused by my intense involvement in questions about the spiritual and supernatural, without yet knowing Christ, and that there was nothing more special about the compassion experience than any of the others. This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 03:44 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
They were created innocent of all sin but with the free will to fall into it. That is different from what happened as a result of their fall. No longer were they innocent and now they had a positive attraction to sin.
I'm sure you are wiser than all the Westminster Divines put together, jar, but, as I posted in my Message 6, here is what they had to say in The Longer Westminster Catechism Question 17How did God create man? Answer 17 After God had made all other creatures, he created man male and female; formed the body of the man of the dust of the ground, and the woman of the rib of the man, endued them with living, reasonable, and immortal souls; made them after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness,and holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and dominion over the creatures; yet subject to fall. Question 20What was the providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created? Answer 20 The providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created, was the placing him in paradise, appointing him to dress it, giving him liberty to eat of the fruit of the earth; putting the creatures under his dominion, and ordaining marriage for his help; affording him communion with himself; instituting the sabbath; entering into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, of which the tree of life was a pledge; and forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death. Question 21Did man continue in that estate wherein God at first created him? Answer 21 Our first parents being left to the freedom of their own will, through the temptation of Satan, transgressed the commandment of God in eating the forbidden fruit; and thereby fell from the estate of innocency wherein they were created. Question 22Did all mankind fall in that first transgression ? Answer 22 The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in that first transgression. Question 23Into what estate did the fall bring mankind? Answer 23 The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and misery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Yes, I acknowledged that some Christian sects beleieve there was a Fall and Original Sin. There are even assertion in the New Testament related to that.
What I said is that when you read Genesis, there is simply no support for either of those positions. If you would like, we can step through the first three chapters of Genesis to see where such an idea might originate. As to the Westminster Catechism, since it doesn't jibe with what the Bible says (for example Answer 17) I have always had a hard time subscribing to it. The story of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is not one of some fall, but rather a gift. Their innocence was the innocence of ignorance. They were not free of sin, and nothing in Genesis says so. Their nature did not change, sin did not enter the world, all that happened was that they became aware that some actions were wrong. Before eating of the forbidden fruit, thy had no way to know that they were even disobeying GOD. Right and wrong had no meaning. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024